Posted on 01/25/2021 2:48:33 PM PST by Kaslin
Far from being a helpless minority, Senate Republicans are in a powerful position to leverage their consent for key priorities from their voters.
In a Senate that is now split 50-50, newly minted Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and his counterpart, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, are negotiating a power-sharing agreement. Although Vice President Kamala Harris wields the tie-breaking vote for Democrats on the Senate floor, the two parties must negotiate how they will manage the day-to-day operations of the institution.
What McConnell agrees to in the upcoming days will tell us a lot about how the Senate GOP plans to comport itself during the next two years. That is particularly true of committees. While committee ratios and budgets are always negotiated between the parties at the beginning of a Congress, the 50-50 split requires the presence of an operating agreement that will determine, for example, how and if President Joe Biden’s nominees are reported from committee.
Under a normal process of consideration, nominees must receive a majority vote to be reported favorably for floor consideration. In a tied Senate, however, where committees are equally divided, a majority vote is far less reliable — the vote could either be tied or not receive a majority of votes. In a normal scenario, this would result in the nomination not moving forward (Unlike legislation, nominees have never been forcibly “discharged” from committee consideration via petition, or bypassed committee consideration in other ways).
Schumer is going to want to clear the path for Biden nominees to be considered on the Senate floor. This will require an agreement with McConnell that nominations that do not receive a majority vote — including those that are tied — will move to the floor, anyway.
If McConnell is going to make this major concession to the narrowest of Democratic majorities, he shouldn’t do so for free.
Enter the legislative filibuster. For the last year, Senate Democrats have indicated both their willingness and intent to blow up the institution by overturning (or “nuking”) the legislative filibuster, packing the Supreme Court, and adding Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia as states (with four new Democrat senators).
These are not threats to be taken lightly, nor should they be brushed off as merely the hot rhetoric of the campaign trail. Without the legislative filibuster — which requires 60 votes to overcome — the Senate becomes a minor league House of Representatives, ruled by the mercurial whims of a majority, where minority voices and causes have no procedural way in which to matter.
While the filibuster is often decried for slowing down, hamstringing, or blocking the legislative process, it was actually designed as a way to facilitate it. Generally speaking, passing legislation in the Senate requires the participation of more than just the majority.
Ending a filibuster — that is, getting to 60 votes in the Senate — requires consensus. It forces the parties to work together, to engage in negotiation, and to perform the give-and-take of legislating. This deliberation is what distinguishes the Senate from the House, where the majority has the full authority to crush the minority, and frequently does.
Furthermore, the filibuster performs an additional important function: it gives individual senators — and the causes that lack support of the majority — a voice they otherwise wouldn’t have. Because overcoming a filibuster requires a large consensus, causes can’t simply be steamrolled.
The concerns of individual senators, or groups of senators, must be given both credence and credibility. Voices and causes that would otherwise be ignored in a majoritarian body like the House receive consideration in the Senate — but only because the filibuster, or threat thereof, makes them matter.
The filibuster, in other words, amplifies otherwise voiceless causes and makes certain that they are taken seriously. For conservatives, as well as the far left of the Democratic Party, who are generally always in the minority even when their party is in the majority, the filibuster is a powerful tool.
Because senators have largely forgotten the art, and work, of legislating, the filibuster shoulders a lot of blame for the Senate’s dysfunction. The Senate rarely considers amendments or engages the levers and pulleys of the parliamentary process, whose function is to facilitate and structure the process of lawmaking.
In Senates of years past, leaders who have allowed for robust debate and ample consideration of amendments have found themselves facing far fewer filibusters. Senators, just like the rest of us, respond favorably — and far less obstructively — when their voices are heard in the legislative process.
The Senate was intended to be the chamber where minority voices, parties, and causes have substantial power. This is why threats from Democrats to fundamentally transform the Senate from a deliberative body into a majoritarian one cannot and should not be ignored.
McConnell seems to understand this. “I believe we need to also address the threats to the legislative filibuster,” he said in a memo circulated to his conference, referencing the power-sharing agreement he is negotiating with Schumer.
Still, it’s unclear how (or if) he intends to use the substantial leverage he possesses. McConnell can trade easier processing of Democratic nominees for a standing order, or a written understanding — a set of rules governing the Senate for the length of the Congress — which would bar any attempt by the Democrats to overturn the legislative filibuster or other attempts to fundamentally change how the Senate functions.
In other words, if McConnell is going to concede to easier processing of Democratic nominees, something Schumer surely wants, he should get something for it: in this case, a procedural commitment that nuking the legislative filibuster would be barred. If Democrats break their word, the concession from Republicans for easier committee processing of their nominees will likewise evaporate.
The opportunity McConnell has in this negotiation broadly reflects the power the Senate Republican conference possesses in a 50-50 Senate. Much of what Democrats want to do in the next two years, before the 2022 midterm elections, will require either their consent to expedite the process or their votes (at least 10 Republicans will have to vote with Democrats to overcome a filibuster on most legislation). Despite facing constant obstruction of Trump nominees for the last four years, Republicans have already conceded to the passage of Biden’s national intelligence director without much of an argument.
Far from being a helpless minority, Senate Republicans are in a powerful position to leverage their consent for key priorities, be they policy or institutional. How McConnell handles these early negotiations will signal what kind of party the Senate GOP intends to be: a party that trades away their leverage for nothing and feigns helplessness as they willingly give Senate Democrats everything they want, or a party interested in using their power to give as much voice and representation as possible to the voters who sent them there.
All moot, when murkowski switches
Who cares? The only thing the GOP will use it for is to force the leftist to pay more money for them to surrender.
Who cares if McConnell can do anything. He’s pure enemy, globalist, corrupt and eyeballs deep in China. He hates the wall and loves Obamacare. He hates Trump and loves the intel “community”.
He offers nothing.
In other words, let schumer have everything he wants and keep the filibuster as an illusion. Sounds like something the gop would agree to eagerly. They are all about deception of where they stand.
Yeah...plus I am sure his commie chink wife will talk him out of it in their brand spanking new beach house!
He doesn’t want to stop it.
The majority of Mitch’s wealth has come from selling the votes of his party when the GOP is in the minority. The filibuster has allowed him to cut deals with the Democrats that line the pockets of he and his fellow RINO Senators.
But McConnell is nearing the end of the trail and most of the current legislation proposed by the Dems are also supported by the ChiComs AND the US Chamber of Commerce.
By offering tepid objections as the filibuster is phased out, he allows his benefactors to get what they want while avoiding blame.
And that’s what he’s excelled at throughout his entire career.
They’ve had a “power sharing” agreement for a long long time.
nailed it
Eliminating the Senate filibuster rule would require a rules change which requires a 2/3 majority to enact. It is unimaginable that 17 Republicans would agree to giving up the filibuster.
The rule harkens back to one of the practices of ancient Rome that made their republic succeed for nearly four centuries. Every elected magisterial office like a counsel would have two holders (like the 2 Senators from each state). Either one could veto the decision of the other so they had to negotiate a mutually agreeable outcome to enact a law. It worked pretty well except for one temporary position called a “dictator” that was given absolute authority to deal with national emergencies and had no counterpart. The most famous of these was Julius Caesar and the rest, as they say, is history.
Mitch already has the Filibuster Card. It requires 60 votes to bring up the motion to change the Filibuster, because it is a Standing Order. He doesn’t need to trade anything to get what he already has.
What if Cocaine Mitch doesn’t want to preserve the filibuster?
“If McConnell is going to make this major concession to the narrowest of Democratic majorities, he shouldn’t do so for free. “
He’ll think he’s bargaining and has a deal. And then the D’s will change the Senate rules anyway to ban the filibuster.
Mitch is probably offering a conviction vote on Trump as a trade for the filibuster.
Too late to grow a spine.
Great summary
If it happens, and that’s doubtful, wouldn’t Schumer be assumed to be using the nuclear option to change the rules of the senate? So to my very limited understanding, that’s 51 votes not 67. Or is that wrong? I’m no expert.
Freegards
Yeah, Schumer will tell McConnell to kiss his arse and McConnell will try to get the number of times down as far as he can.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.